[r6rs-discuss] The definition of flonum is in the wrong place

From: William D Clinger <will>
Date: Sun Oct 8 20:36:01 2006

Paul Schlie wrote:
> then presumably scheme is broken defining:
>
> (fl= +nan.0 +nan.0) => #f ; being that ieee defines it as #t

As John Cowan pointed out, the IEEE-754 standard
requires equality tests that involve a NaN to
come out false.

> or
> (flexpt -1.0 +inf.0) => NaN (hopefully); as ieee defines it as oddly 1.0

The IEEE-754 standard does not define anything
corresponding to Scheme's expt or proposed flexpt.

A full (but unofficial) text of the now withdrawn
IEEE-754 standard is available online, as is the
full text of the current working draft that has
been proposed as its replacement, IEEE-754R [1].

Will

[1] http://www.validlab.com/754R/
Received on Sun Oct 08 2006 - 20:35:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Oct 23 2024 - 09:15:01 UTC